Why Neo-Adventism Is More Dangerous Than Regular Adventism | Dr. Tim Jennings

Well greetings it is good to be back with you all and an especially warm welcome if this is your first time with us Adventist or otherwise so tonight we are going to be listening to an individual that a lot of you have asked about for a minute now um just happens to be that now is when we’re getting around to it we’re going to be listening to uh Neo Adventist Dr Tim Jennings from come and reason Ministries I want to by saying that Tim Jennings is a smart guy um I read his book uh it’s been quite some time now the god-shaped brain some years ago um and he said some pretty

Informative stuff uh but it’s definitely built upon the foundational Adventist claim that the primary issue with mankind is a faulty understanding of the character of God and you know if the brain can be engaged at that level people will come to God if they can shift the way that the person thinks about God that sort of thing the uh the standard sort of great controversy Mo if you will but it’s also important to note that Dr Jennings clearly dislikes the Western Christian tradition I’ve noticed this with him uh anytime that I listen to him namely though the belief that the

True God is indeed a god of wrath and that wrath was appeased in the offering up of the son by God the Father it is also clear like we will see tonight that he feels that vestages of that are present within Adventist theology obviously it was concocted in in the west but specifically regarding the atonement which is why he has developed a name for himself within the Seventh Day Adventist world he also has his own Bible paraphrase called the remedy um which is something we will look at later if you thought the uh the Blurred word was bad aka the clear word um yeah the

Remedy paraphrase makes the the clear word look like an ancient biblical manuscript but most notably is his unique take on the Adventist doctrine of the investigative judgment which is what we’re going to be be uh listening to tonight in part one as we work our way through his presentation in a multi-part fashion but for those that are new to this I used the phrase Neo Adventist what is that we have an article on the answering adventism website titled what is Neo adventism in part it says quote Neo adventism is a term you may hear us use in article or video we

Coined it to distinguish traditional Orthodox 7th Day Adventist Doctrine from its modernized reinterpretations this newer flavor of adventism reflects a blending of Evangelical thought with the foundational 7th a Adventist framework particularly the great controversy theme while Neo Adventists often profess alignment with the denomination’s stated beliefs they frequently articulate position that diverge significantly from Orthodox SDA teachings this inconsistency can create confusion among those seeking clarity about Adventist Doctrine and practice

Often making Neo adventism far more theologically dangerous close quote and that is exactly correct the Neo Adventist flavors of adventism have done a good job of blurring the lines and making adventism seem theologically in uous but what you will find is that under the surface it is the same poisonous product just packaged in a new rapper which is why tonight’s presentation is happening we will begin like I said a multi-part exam of Dr jenning’s presentation on his theory and I want to focus particularly on how despite his departure from SDA Orthodoxy he still has a great

Controversy worldview like every other Adventist which is why I call him a Neo adven at the end of the day that’s what binds all of adventism and no matter how much the Neo Adventist try and do the the lipstick on the theological Pig thing it will not Salvage what is fundamentally broken adventism is not salvageable folks to to salvage it would be to rid it of its entire identity and its pillars resulting in there really being no no use for it but something else I need to remind you all of before we listen you need to remember that within Adventist theology the word atonement

Uniquely refers to the investigative judgment so adventism does not mean the same thing Christians do when discussing the atonement because none of us believe this unique Doctrine only they do and I want to say something here before we get into this I’ve noticed amongst Advent a scholarship they’re all trying to appeal now to to David Moffett from St Andrews over in Scotland he’s in individual I I was in his paper actually before starting this his Hebrews in the atonement paper I I’ve also heard Roman Catholics appealing to Dr Moffet ironically

Enough and it’s interesting because they think that by appealing to someone like this it shows that see other people are coming on board other people are coming on board now what Dr moffett’s putting forth and even Roman Catholics even Roman Catholics that think the atonement is ongoing that does not now vindicate the investigative judgment so just remember that when you hear Advent a scholarship or individuals we get people that comment this stuff I had a guy copy and paste an excerpt from Dr moffett’s article uh I don’t know a couple weeks ago folks they don’t have a great

Controversy worldview that does not vindicate adventism so just remember that but like I said atonement in the Adventist model refers specifically to the investigative judgment as SDA scholar worship even recognizes you can see an example of this in the book salvation Contours of AOS soteriology which is on the bookshelf behind me where SDA Theologian John Pauline writes quote one of the most debated topics of Christian theology is expressed in these questions why the cross what really happened at the cross the answers to these questions have been widely debated

Under the general heading of the atonement but when seventh day Adventists approached the matter of atonement in immediate dilemma is perceived when Adventists talk about atonement they refer specifically to what Jesus is doing now in the Heavenly Sanctuary on the other hand when Scholars outside the Seventh Day Adventist Church discuss the atonement they refer specifically to the cross of Jesus Christ and what God was doing there close quote which is is why Dr Jennings has attracted both critics and supporters within the movement many Neo Adventists

Admire him for offering what they see as a solution to a longstanding doctrinal issue that has plagued the SDA movement since its Inception others criticize him for introducing what they view as a deception by reinterpreting this Doctrine away from Ellen White and the SDA Pioneers so the focus of tonight isn’t on Tim Jennings as a person it’s not about Tim Jennings the man but on how at the end of the day it’s all the same it’s all the same the the Neo Adventist the liberal Adventist the conservative Adventist the whole Spectrum at its core is no different

It’s the same toxic product from the organization AKA The Great controversy worldview that they’re trying to get you to adopt but it’s packaged for different audiences in a different way that’s why people like Dr Jennings are allowed to exist in the organization without the organization completely booting people like this because at the end of the day they’re just accepting the fact that there’s various people out there like Ty Gibson and David asri at light Bears they do the same sort of thing adventism is just like everyone else basically yeah we have a couple nuances here and

There that type thing I’m not saying Dr Jennings is nefarious when I say that I’m sure he’s a genuine sincere guy who’s passionate about helping people most doctors are he’s a psychiatrist but we gotta call a spade a spade his alternate teachings are the excuse that a lot of Adventists are using to remain within this deceptive organization but one last thing before we get into it if you like what we are doing here please consider becoming a channel member you will gain access to not only our membersonly video library including members only live streams but our behind

The curtain Discord server which just launched a couple weeks ago where you can connect with the answering adventism Community including myself you can ask questions get behind the scenes looks at what’s upcoming and much more so if you want to join simply visit the link in the description box down below click the little join button down below this video or visit our Channel homepage like you see on screen where you will find the same button in two places This truly is a group effort so thank you all so much for your support with that said let’s

Get into it we’re going to talk about the investigative judgment through the healing lens how many have heard of the doctrine called the investigative judgment okay how many have a clear understanding of what that is yeah have you found that Doctrine to be kind of sometimes I mean maybe you studied it but it’s like as you read it it’s like I must be missing something I must be some piece I’m I’m not quite getting because it seems pretty difficult to comprehend at times Well I hopefully that we’ll present this to you in a way that maybe you’ve never

Considered it before and I tended to an evidence-based approach I’m going to try to put the pieces of of evidence together to see if we can’t bring it bring it to to home for you yes Dr Jennings this is a very complex Doctrine and I’d venture to say that 95% of 7th Day Adventists couldn’t confident uh confidently explain it to you and an even larger percentage couldn’t explain its role within the larger seven-step Sanctuary model that it is a part of and here’s why this is a major problem folks ah yes yes as always the Adventist Pope had this to

Say and yes I say Pope because this organization tells us that Ellen White’s writings correct inaccurate interpretations of scripture and that their supposedly divinely inspired Revelation from God himself hence why I have photoshopped a miter onto her head from G great controversy page 488 she writes quote those who would share the benefits of the savior’s mediation should permit nothing to interfere with their duty to perfect Holiness in the fear of God the precious hours instead of being given to pleasure to display or to gain seeking should be devoted to an Earnest

Prayerful study of the word of Truth the subject of the sanctuary in the investigative judgment should be clearly understood by the people of God clearly understood all need a knowledge for themselves of the position and work of their great high priest otherwise uhoh it will be impossible for them to exercise the faith which is essential at this time or to occupy the position which God designs them to fill every individual has a soul to save or to lose each has a case pending at the bar of God oh that’s legal language the bar each must meet the great judge again

Legal language face to face close quote yet what Dr Jennings is going to present is a reimagining of this teaching more than likely as a result of the Orthodox teaching being a total mess and complex web to navigate and learn but Ellen White carries more weight than the good doctor that’s always the rub when it comes to those that have tried to Rebrand or reimagine Orthodox SDA teaching which is why I said earlier that it ends up creating more problems than it solves very clearly she warned that those who do not understand this Doctrine risk their ET eternity because

They need to understand they have a case pending at the bar of God and if you want to share in the benefits of Christ mediation which is necessary for salvation you can’t let anything interfere with your duty to perfect Holiness otherwise otherwise it will be impossible for a person to exercise the faith necessary to occupy the position that God has designed them to fill and not just the investigative judgment folks also the sanctuary Doctrine as a whole Which is far more complex than just the prear uh the pre-advent judgment and let’s not forget what she

Meant by Perfect Holiness I show this all the time we inevitably always get Adventists that think no no no it’s just she just meant trying your best she’s just using the words of

Paul same book page 623 while the investigative judgment is going on it’s what they mean by the word atonement one needs to seek to become perfect perfect in Christ thankfully she then goes on to Define that for us where she gives us an analogy she uses Jesus being tempted by Satan in the wilderness and says not a single sin could be found within him that could give the devil a foothold and this is the condition that one must be found in when probation closes well probation closes when the investigative judgment ends and that’s when the time of trouble

Will start you’ll be without a mediator and Satan will be loosed and he’ll be able to find a foothold if you haven’t gotten to this sinlessly perfect State and you won’t make it notice the last sentence what condition must one be found in as sinless as Jesus so remember this tonight as we listen to Dr Jennings evidence-based healing model okay and I’ll repeat don’t give me wrong Jennings is a smart guy no doubt about it don’t think there aren’t smart individuals that are caught up in this movement folks there are and I say that a lot Dr Jennings is a brilliant man but

He’s not a theologian and to try and propose an alternate model that deviates from the quotes we just read strikes a straight blow to the entire SDA edifice death blow because it logically leads to the entire structure not being able to stand upon scrutiny the the truth should be the Anvil that can wear out any Hammer so whether he recognizes that I I don’t know because if you’re out of sync with her then you call her into question and she’s one of the pillars and as Dr Douglas has told us numerous times they’re mutually supportive clusters they support one another if one Falls

The whole thing falls apart they need it all you can’t just come along just hand wave her away oh she’s just a great commentator yeah maybe for you maybe for you but what I do know is that the SDA Church tells us the quotes I read are divinely inspired claims direct Revelation from the throne room of God and what I also know is the SDA church is handing out millions of copies of the great controversy billions including digital copies evidencing that they stand by the words and teachings contained within it and what she said is ultimately necessary within the the larger great

Controversy Paradigm that Tim himself possesses as an Adventist all these new and kind of you know zany theories to try and make something toxic not be toxic only result only results in a worse toxin because at its root this doctrine’s false it’s Antichrist anti-gospel Etc no amount of reimagining will change that especially when the good doctor just told us that his proposed model is evidence-based so first the investigative judgment is a unique Doctrine to the 7th Adventist Church as far as I know no other Christian organization has this particular Doctrine this Doctrine came

Out of the millerite movement millerite movement in uh 1840 in 18 early 1800s uh predicted that Christ was going to come in 1844 then he didn’t come in the aftermath of the great disappointment of 1844 people wanted to understand what happened how do we understand this Bible prophecy we were so sure something was going to happen and in the aftermath of that disappointment they eventually developed the doctrine called the investigative judgment Daniel 8:14 is the prophecy that William Miller used to predict the date of 1844 and so the the high points of what

The traditional model of the investigative judgment taught within adventism has been is that the 2300 day prophecy ended in 1844 Christ entered the most holy place of the sanctuary in heaven in 1844 he began cleansing the sanctuary of the sins of the people this uh also required the investigation of uh of records and and judgment and investigative judgment to determine who was fit and who was unfit whose sins have been accounted for and whose sins had not been accounted for all cases uh of the professed followers of Christ get reviewed and findings are

Made God’s judgment in who he allows into heaven and who he doesn’t is Vindicated he’s proven that that he is right in his discernment and and judgment and it uh the investigative judgment ends with human uh ends human probation and it culminates in the second coming of Christ this these points are the points you’ll find if you look in the 27 fundamental beliefs the 28 fundamental beliefs on the investigated judgment these are the high points of what this Doctrine kind of brings together the entire presentation and historical view of this is predicated as

A legal or taught as a legal prop process it’s the investigation of Records legal accounting of sins judicial findings rendering of legal judgments removing of record of sins from books in heaven this entire thing is predicated on this view single idea that God’s law functions like human law a system of rules that you impose that require external adjudication a Judicial finding of some magistrate to investigate and come to conclusion most thinking people recognize there’s some flaw in that he he who knows all things then from the beginning he doesn’t need to investigate

He knows everything there’s no need for that there there’s many many questions that arise in this Doctrine for people when it’s presented in this in this view that God functions like human courts function all right so one thing I want to point out first notice that the way Tim described this teaching historically his bullet points is how I have numerous times yet Adventists will claim I’m misrepresenting and lying oh brother yeah Tim Tim knows Tim knows now what I I don’t know if he knows is if he understood what he tacitly admitted here but wow wow

Tim I couldn’t agree more but Dr Jennings why is the inclination to try and revamp this ridiculous sounding doctrine that in his words most thinking people here and think that sounds ridiculous contradictory and confusing why isn’t the thinking huh well that falsifies adventism it’s odd to me that a psychiatrist would go down the road of trying to revitalize something that they recognize sounds foolish and illogical especially considering that as a card carrying Adventist one would have to uphold all 28 fundamental beliefs and how they are formulated especially this one

Considering it’s the whole Lynch pin of 1844 Dr Jennings contention in this area is with his propus that his movement tells us was divinely inspired in correcting of inaccurate interpret ations of scripture we just read from her yeah she uses legal language she’s the one that claimed to be shown all this stuff in Vision regarding its legal framework an entire aspect of the model is titled the courtroom scene like I showed earlier once probation closes you’ll be left to stand without a mediator Satan will be accusing you Jesus will be advocating but only for

Those who made it through the investigative judgment those that didn’t Satan’s accusation against them will stand and it was Ellen White that recognized that Daniel 8:14 was the pillar of the millerite movement and that that pillar carried over by necessity into the 7th Day Adventist movement because the reinterpretation of that error was the alleged get out of jail free card for being wrong about the second coming happening in 1844 this quote is from the chapter of great controversy titled what is the sanctuary all of what he presented on his slide was confirmed by Ellen White

Who was supposed to function for their movement as the Divine stamp of approval on doctrinal understanding by way of that supposedly helping to enhance the Bible storyline but it also doesn’t contradict it in any way that would include the legal framework of the doctrine integral to the entire system what would I ECT is that the other problem he recognizes is that if that is the case then there’s no way to bypass the sinless perfectionism the legalism all that stuff comes with it perfectionism folks tends to be the other area one of the other areas that

The Neo Adventists have tried to distance themselves from but since it’s intimately connected to the investigative judgment no amount of reimagining hand waving no it it won’t remove that this is Central this is another Central aspect a prepared people victory over sin all these buzzword they use to try and make it sound more Pious and Noble than it is you can’t handwave that stuff away that’s part of how the Adventist God is going to vindicate himself which is what Tim and the Neo Adventists are supposed to be all about part of God being Vindicated is

You demonstrating you can keep the law correctly oh more legal language but I want to suggest to you I want to show you the evidence that in fact this idea that God’s law functions like human law is the lie that’s infected the sanctuary or contaminated that the sanctuary Doctrine is to be cleansed or the sanctuary is to be cleansed from how do you see God’s law do you see God in his law is designer Builder space time reality his laws the laws upon which life are constructed including the physical laws but also the moral laws and just like physical laws laws of

Gravity laws of thermodynamics you can’t change them you cannot change moral laws and just like when you violate physical laws there’s damage to you when you violate moral laws it Sears the conscience hardens the heart warps the character takes you further and further out of harmony with the the kingdom of love and God’s design for for life or do you see God’s laws no no different than a Roman Caesar making up a rule and then threatening to punish and kill you if you don’t keep his rule designer I just described and the dictator the rules imposed with threats

Of punishment well let’s look at the Bible what does the bible describe as God’s law in Old Testament if you Faithfully obey the commands I am giving you today to love the Lord your God and to serve him with all your heart and soul then all these various blessings follow New Testaments even expounds this more Romans love does no harm to its neighbor therefore love is fulfillment of the law Galatians the entire law is summed up in a single command love your neighbor as yourself James if you keep the Royal law found in script script love your neighbors yourself you’re

Doing right but maybe we should turn to Jesus who said love Lord your God with all your heart mind soul and strength and neighbors yourself all law hangs on this all of it now this is not simple compassion this is not simple empathy or concern this is functional it’s operational it’s constructional it’s how God can built reality to function and when God built his reality it’s an expression of his nature of love and Paul says in Romans that God’s divine nature is seen and what he has made so that men that excuse there are many examples of this the one

That’s most easy for people to grasp is the the law of respiration Every Breath You give you give away carbon dioxide to the plants and they give oxygen back to you which is a never-ending circle of giving upon which life is built but you’re free to transgress the law you can tie a plastic bag over your head and selfishly hoard your carbon dioxide to yourself but the wages of that is this is a physical example of exactly what happens when you violate God’s moral law you’re cutting yourself off from the source of life and you will die I’m going to tell you a secret now when was

The last time you got up in the morning and said man I’ve got to breathe today 12 breaths a minute let’s see 60 minutes in an hour 24 hours that’s a lot of breathing you see when you’re healthy you don’t even think about it breathing is easy but when you’re really really sick breathing can become painful it can become hard you might even need artificial respiration to help you breathe when God has his way in our life and fixes what’s wrong inside us it will be as easy to love other people as it is to breathe that’s the natural god-designed function for all of his beings but we’re

Really sick we don’t naturally love we’re fear-based and self-centered and afraid of getting hurt we’re self-protective and so we need God’s artificial love respirator to help us love well now but his goal is to fix us and set us free to love like he loves all right so this sounds like the standard rhetoric often used by Neo Adventists like Ty Gibson where the word love is reduced to this you know Buzz word that’s repeated just ad nauseum dozens of times in a single presentation he however presented a false dichotomy by asking whether you view God as a designer or a

Dictator the problem lies in how he frames dictator because much of what he class ifies under that label like we’re going to see aligns with Biblical descriptions of God’s justice which makes his framing problematic God of course is not a dictator however it’s also true that God’s law does to some extent aim to regulate and control Behavior but by oversimplifying things as he did he creates a flawed starting point for the presentation let’s take for example what Paul says regarding natural law in Romans 2 and we’re actually going to read through some of it not just do the

Bullet Point Breeze over because what he mentioned in Romans 1 is chained to this and it actually completely backfires on what he’s going to go on to say here later regarding what Christians allegedly believe I talk about this pretty regularly that the issue I have with the Adventist view of the law is not the law itself but the SDA Church’s misunderstanding an unlawful use of the law well one of the valid uses put forth in scripture is that it is to restrain the evildoers and protect the righteous from the wicked notice Romans 22-16 for example

We read for all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law for it’s not the hearer of the law hearers of the law who are righteous before God but the doers of the law who will be justified for when Gentiles who do not have the law by Nature by Nature do what the law requires they are a law to themselves even though they do not have have the law they show that the work of the law is written on their hearts while their conscience also Bears witness and their conflicting thoughts

Accuse or even excuse them on that day when according to my gospel God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus thus the reading of God’s holy and inspired word this passage is part of Paul’s explanation that both Jews and Gentiles are equal in their standing before God as Sinners talked about this before the book of Romans is broken up into three parts chapters 1 through three deal with the sin problem four through roughly 10 11 deal with the remedy to that problem the remaining chapters to 16 deal with how should we live in light of that good

News now so this is part of Paul’s explanation to Jewish converts who would have been under the impression I’m not a dog like a gentile I’m a Jew and Paul here is explaining to them no all he’s going to get on to saying in chapter three all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God but in this particular paropy he’s pointing out something to them regarding how even Gentile who didn’t have the law given to them they still have a law and it’s natural so follow with that Paul’s Jewish Christian audience may have been tempted to believe that they were

Superior to Gentiles because God gave the law to the Jewish people and established the Covenant with them at SI but Paul then rebukes this mindset pointing out that being Jewish does not place above Gentiles in the sight of God he explains that even Gentiles who were not given the law follow its moral precepts when they obey their conscience why because natural or moral law is written on the conscience of every person Jew and Gentile alike and what Tim cited from in the previous chapter Paul had already established that all of humanity is without excuse

Before God and why is this well Paul says it’s because of General Revelation the creation itself and God’s sustaining power have made his existence known to all people as a part of this created order the human conscience then serves as an innate conviction mechanism that’s placed by God within all of humanity this this is also an example here folks that I’m going to upset some people by this so be it this is also evidence that Paul’s not just talking about ceremonial law in in Romans folks it’s not the ceremonial law that’s written upon the conscience natural law

Moral law there’s a distinction in the law between moral ceremonial and civil we’re going to be looking at some of that a little bit later we’re going to get into some Thomas aquinus but nevertheless Paul’s point to the Jews here is clear so what if God gave you the law externally that doesn’t make you Superior to Gentiles before God because even Gentiles act morally when they follow their conscience because the natural law is inscribed on every human heart which again is bolstering his fundamental overarching point which is that we all stand condemned before God

Equally which he verbatim states in the next chapter so what problem does this copy present for Dr jenning’s claim well verses 14 and 15 clearly show that the law operates internally on the conscience as a restraining mechanism to guide and influence behavior it convicts individuals when they act wrongly and it excuses them when they do what is morally right and praise God for that think about how many people have in a fit of rage considered going out and doing heinous things but their conscience stopped them that was the final barrier mechanism they couldn’t physically be

Restrained so their conscience restrains them because God has put that within them unless they’ve just seared it to where it just doesn’t even function anymore but Tim’s framing is fundamentally flawed viewing the law as a behavioral control mechanism does not contradict or negate the scriptural reference to the law in relation to love it just means that one must study the subject more comprehensively and be able to think in proper categories it isn’t enough to just proof text all the places where the Bible mentions the law being a fulfillment of

Love to the detriment of whatever else is said the real issue in this area for orthodox Adventist Theology and the investigative judgment lies in their misuse of the law and their flawed understanding of the Law’s purpose they erroneously teach Orthodox adventism that the law law combined with faith establishes a right relationship with God and that a person’s obedience to the law then sustains and maintains this relationship you’re in by faith kept by your obedience this is the new perspective on Paul nonsense covenantal nomism Jesus opened the way for you to

Enter but then to remain you have to do your part again this is historically what’s been called covenantal G nomism in by faith kept by obedience no that’s not the role of obedience and it’s my hypothesis that this fundamental flaw is what has resulted in Dr Jennings trying to figure out a workaround Christianity the early Christian Church the Apostolic Church functioned on this Jesus gave of himself sacrificed himself in love to heal and to save Greater Love is no man that he give his life for a friend this is how we know what love is that Christ gave his

Life for us we give our lives for our brothers for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son whoever seeks to save his life will lose it but he who surrenders or gives his life for me will find it there’s this principle upon which life is built that God is trying to communicate to us the early church operated this way you see them Living Community sacrificing to help those less fortunate giving of themselves others refusing to go to war against the Roman State instead dying self-sacrificial as Martyrs in the gospel spread in the first century

Rapidly something changed in Christianity though what changed in Christianity how they understood God’s law and therefore how they understood God Daniel actually prophesied this was going to happen he prophesizes a little horn power is going to rise and this power is going to seek to change God’s law and so the question how did the idea and notice I put the word idea because can human beings actually change God’s law no we can’t do it we can only change the way we think or the idea concept of God’s law how did the idea of God’s law get changed imperialism that God’s

Government or laws function no different than the way human beings laws function now what is the evidence that I can show you from history to prove my point on this well what church committee ever got together and decided to change the laws of gravity and vote in committee to change the law of respiration I understand in California there’s a lot of fires going on right now there’s some bad air quality why doesn’t the committee get together and say if you join the Aven church when the when the pollution level gets to a certain level we won’t require that you

Breathe you’ll be free of that burden you laugh at me but there’s a point here Church committees never vote to make those changes do they and there’s a reason why is the reason because they can’t it won’t make any difference whatever so what would it mean then if a church committee did vote to change God’s law wouldn’t it be proof and evidence that they don’t see God’s law as design law they see it just as an arbitrary set of rules it’s changeable and in fact you know the history The Church did change the Commandments God’s law the worship from one day to another

Remov the second commandment about images split the 10th into two they made changes to the law why would they do that because they don’t see God’s law as design law and so the real change to God’s law is not the change in the day of worship the real change to God’s law is how you conceive of his law a system of rules like men make that God has to adjudicate and inflict punishments for breaking that’s the real change that infected Christianity that the little horn was going to come across oh brother okay get comfortable folks there’s a lot we have to look at

Here okay first I’d point out that Jesus himself equated sin as a debt and debt is a legal term sin absolutely has a legal aspect Dr Jennings that’s not where it ends but it’s absolutely included cross reference The Lord’s Prayer folks Matthew records forgive us our debts Luke records forgive us our sins even says debt later in the same passage Jesus equated sin with legal debt further more Colossians 2 what was nailed to the cross was the sin debt I’ve gone into this before you can check out this article from our website where I go into it further read the text

Carefully folks there’s a lot of arguments about Colossians 2 for all sorts of various reasons between all sorts of various groups Protestants Catholics Adventists Protestants Adventist evangelicals torist people Hebrew Roots people Everyone goes to Colossians 2 read the text carefully pay attention to what’s being AB ated canell done away with there are a lot of arguments around what this passage is saying that it’s talking about the law being nailed to the cross only ceremonial laws being nailed to the cross Etc but if you pay close attention you’ll find that what’s nailed

To the cross is what Christ bore Peter tells us in his epistle first epistle or sorry Second Epistle that our sins were placed on Christ on the tree Paul’s own theology confirms this in 2 Corinthians 5 he who knew no sin became sin what’s being canceled in Colossians 2 is the sin debt of Believers and like I show in the article not trying to get into all this tonight but the word that’s translated handwriting of ordinances or certificate of debt some translations will say that word is is what in in just literature I guess it’s a broader term than just

Theological the term that’s translated for those phrases is a hopo legam which is simply the very fancy way to refer to a word that only occurs in a single text in a single time in a body of text the only place that the word appears in all of scripture is there in Colossians 2 and it’s a legal term it’s a legal term so my hypothesis is that Dr Jennings has been influenced to a degree by Eastern Theology and he has tried to infuse some of that into Orthodox Adventist teaching as a saline to try and repair what is badly wounded now I don’t want to

Misrepresent the east here but my understanding is that the Orthodox Churches have a similar rejection of the legal framework around sin and they uphold uh they uphold um and also advocate for a predominantly healing focused framework like a medicinal you Orthodox in the audience can correct me if I’m wrong down in the comments and to be fair I got to be fair some of what Tim presents sounds like some of the ideas found in the likes of the capid ocian fathers like Gregory of Nissa he taught and believed that God’s punishments were essentially strictly

Medicinal not retributive or punitive that’s basically what Tim is trying to get at here it very clearly sounds like he’s been influenced by like an Eastern way of thinking like an Eastern esque spin on the investigative judgment which makes sense because he’s a doctor and is probably passionate about healing but he clearly does not like the Latin Western Christian tradition’s usage of legal language surrounding atonement but it’s because of the Bible friends it’s because of the Bible God is the one that uses legal language to help us understand and describe this and I’m

Not saying the atonement is only legal only legal of course it has more Dimensions than that but my point is that it’s very hard to come away from reading the New Testament and see all that it has to say about atonement and not recognize all of the legal language that is used to describe such but I have to point something out here of vital importance okay I mentioned Ty Gibson earlier well we’ve heard this exact same thing from him numerous times when he was preaching about the reformation and what was taking place there like Gibson Jennings presents the

Early church as being identified by their love for one another and yes Jesus told the disciples before he ascended and they were worried that uh you know they were they were fearful because um of his of his departure he said the comforter would be sent to them the Holy Spirit they’d be guided by him Etc on top of this that the culture around them would see their love for each other and that’s how they would know that they were Jesus’s disciples in his physical absence but that’s only one side of the coin the gospel is not just hallmarked by Behavior the church is not just

Hallmarked by Behavior it’s also hallmarked by Doctrine Doctrine he talked about what we see in the early church regarding behavior but Dr Jennings what we don’t see at all in the early church is the investigative judgment or a great controversy worldview which brings all sorts of details from outside of the Bible from a pre-earth origin story to then try and make sense of the Bible in light of that information yeah none no one in the early church had that no one in the early church contrary to their claims as we’ve looked at numerous times believed

About the Sabbath like they do even if you wanted to Grant to them they were all seventh day sabbatarians which I don’t but they didn’t believe that it was the mark of Sunday was going to be the mark of the beast all this other stuff which they appeal to present truth on but the point being is they didn’t believe all that well the SDA Church claims that the investigative judgment is a part of the Gospel yet the apostles didn’t teach it it’s entirely novel to adventism as Tim even recognized in his introduction where he said as much I have shown Source after Source

After Source on this platform where the SD Church itself recognizes that this Doctrine is entirely novel to the 19th century and yet they say it’s part of the Gospel it’s part of this Everlasting gospel that’s being restored so Dr Jennings my question for you what committee in history voted to change the gospel since what your movement proclaims to be the gospel is an entirely novel present truth message that only you all have Paul says there’s only one gospel Galatians 1 6-9 and anyone preaching a different one is twice cursed the Apostle tells us twice cursed by

God but then we heard him mentioned Daniel 7:25 in the Catholic encyclopedia here we go again he posited the standard SDA assertions around this with a minor caveat he said the law wasn’t actually changed it was just man’s perception of the law that changed aka the law being a trans a transcript of God’s character the character of God became aligned because of Satan and God’s vindicating his character and that because the law apparently wasn’t seen as design law late into the early Christian Church they instead developed the idea that it was just a set of arbitrary rules that

Are changeable Dr Jennings respectfully you don’t know what you’re talking about here just going to put that out there we’ve heard this same thing from from Doug Bachelor for example and it’s common SDA rhetoric based on historical revisionism and not actually being well vered on the actual sources so let’s work down these errant claims I get frustrated when I hear this because I’m sick of hearing them lie about this when this whole thing that he’s presenting here is built on all these varying steps that he’s going through link after link after Link in the chain

Is broken and they need to stop misrepresenting people first no the early church didn’t see the law as an arbitrary set of rules that are m okay the early church understood natural law like I mentioned earlier in Romans 2 this is what the medieval Scholastics like Thomas aquinus and the toomas built upon regarding their understanding of natural law as we’re going to see later the Thomas did not and do not claim that the law has been changed this is a myth that Adventists regularly assert about the Roman Catholic position and it is false and it’s sad that a

Reformed guy like myself has to constantly point this out but here we are again let’s prove this before we look at aquinus this is from Alexander car’s a history of the medieval political theory in the West for those unaware Carlile was a a church historian he speaks about numerous patristics here meaning early church fathers who recognized natural law in scripture notice what he says quote the writer known as ambrosiaster for those that don’t know ambrosiaster is a pseudo pseudonym for an unknown individual people originally thought it was Ambrose St Ambrose later

Scholarship has determined that that’s probably not the case either way it was a real individual that lived in the fourth Century nevertheless in his commentary on St Paul’s epistle to the Romans he gives us an interesting tripartite division of the law that’s a three-fold division like I mentioned earlier moral monial and civil and a statement of the relation of the law of nature to the law of Moses ah the definition is interesting but more significant is the conception of the relation of the Mosaic law to the natural law as being something intended

To supplement as well as to confirm it the same conception is expressed in a letter of St Ambrose the Mosaic law was given because men had failed to obey the natural law again St Ambrose says law is twofold natural and written the natural law is in man’s heart the written laws in tables all men are under law that is under the natural law and again the law of God is in the heart of the just man which law not the written but the natural law for law is is not set for the just but for the unjust man the natural law says St Jerome speaks in our heart telling us to do

What is good and to avoid what is evil and again he says that whole world received the natural law and the Mosaic law was given because the natural law was neglected or destroyed it is interesting to notice that the fathers frequently as we’ as we have before said connect their treatment of the natural law with St Paul’s phrases in Romans which is what we just looked at St Ambrose for instance says that it is the Apostle who teaches us that the natural law is in our hearts St Augustine also refers to St Paul’s words in a passage in which he divides law

Into three species and St Hillary does the same in describing the general scope of the natural law close quote Dr Jennings you could replace the word natural here with design and say design law because Paul is speaking in Romans 1 and 2 about the created order the actual way that God designed things and what is hardcoded into the design itself like respiration he keeps mentioning respiration the law of respiration St Ambrose St Augustine St Jerome origin St Hillary countless others all support that this was a wise spread understanding because of Paul’s epistle

To the Romans and this is what laid the foundation for medieval scholasticism that would later systematize the present Roman Catholic belief around the law which naturally also bled over into the reformed tradition as well so he’s correct when he claims that the Christian Church fell into thinking the law of God or or sorry he’s incorrect when he claims that the Christian Church fell into thinking the law of God is just some arbitrary set of rules that can be changed and not something that’s a part of God’s design because the law that he has in in

Focus is the moral law whether Tim knows this or not he has inherited the The Works of of ainus dun scotus he he has inherited the work and labor of the medieval Scholastics who systematized the three-fold division of the law that his movement upholds yet they’ll misrepresent and slander that tradition drives me crazy the crowd that espouses what Tim is talking about is a fringe minority antinomians which is a later doctrinal accretion it’s not normative Orthodox Christian teaching which is why I’m somewhat skeptical of Tim’s historical theology

In this area and if he’s actually done the heavy lifting and this is going to be further affirmed later but that’s one second his evidence for this claim was that the Roman Catholic Church supposedly removed the second commandment changed the day of worship and split the tenth commandment into two because they don’t see God’s law as design law they see it as some arbitrary list of rules that can change and he cited the new Catholic encyclopedia volume 4 to support this folks this is fiction this is fiction but here we are once again and we have

To address this because if you make this claim to a knowledgeable Roman Catholic you are going to be left with your tail between your legs your face flush feeling foolish for having fallen for such fiction please please please stop using these arguments please please because then I and and people like myself have to deal with your sloppy work we get saddled with this you guys don’t understand they don’t understand Roman Catholics Orthodox love saddling us Protestants with this nonsense they love taking this lwh hanging fruit and saddling us with it so

Please stop just stop and I’m going to show you why or starters the Roman Catholic Church affirms what is called The augustinian Ordering of the 10 commandments they didn’t remove anything they didn’t remove anything okay lutherans also o affirmed the augustinian ordering it’s not just Roman Catholicism this has been a long debate back to the second and third Century of the New Testament Church which I’ll show the proof on in a moment but first folks here’s what Dr Jennings didn’t cite from the Catholic encyclopedia okay then we’re going to show what he

Omitted quote there is no numerical division of The Commandments in the Books of Moses but the injunctions are distinctly tenfold and are found almost identical in both sources the order to is the same except for the final prohibitions pronounced against concupiscence that of Deuteronomy being adopted in preference to Exodus a confusion however exists in the numbering which is due to a difference of opinion concerning the initial precept of divine worship meaning the first two Commandments technically the first three the system of numeration found in

Catholic Bibles is based on the Hebrew text and was made by St Augustine in the fifth century in his book of questions of Exodus and was adopted by the Council of Trent it is followed also by the German lutherans except those of the school of bucer this Arrangement makes the first commandment relate to false worship and to the worship of false gods as to a single subject and a single class of sins to be guarded against the reference to Idols being regarded as mere application of the precept to adore but one God and the prohibition as directed against the particular offense of

Idolatry alone according to this manner of Reckoning the injunction forbidding the use of the lord’s name in vain comes second in order and the decimal number is safeguarded by making a division of the final precept on concupisent the n pointing to sins of the Flesh and the 10th to desires for unlawful possessions of Goods close quote so no they didn’t remove the second commandment there’s a longstanding argument around the numbering because the Hebrew text doesn’t include numbers in fact there’s more than 10 imperatives there’s actually 13 I think the augustinian ordering simply

Con joins what many understand as the second commandment to what we call those that don’t affirm the augustinian ordering the first because both have to do with idolatry there’s nothing nefarious going on here now the evidence of this being an ancient debate notice what origin wrote about this in his homes on Exodus which are from roughly 220 ad quote the first commandment therefore is you shall not have other gods beside me and after this follows you shall not make for yourself an idol nor any uh nor any likeness of anything which is in heaven above or in the earth beneath or

In the waters under the Earth you shall neither adore nor worship them for I am the Lord your God a jealous God who avenges the sins of the fathers on the sons to the third and fourth generation for those who hate me and shows Mercy to thousands for those who love me and who keep my Commandments some think that all these words together are one commandment but if it be thus supposed the number 10 of The Commandments will not be completed and where now will be the truth of the decalog but if be divided in that manner in which we also separated it in the

Preceding reading the whole number of Ten Commandments will appear the first commandment therefore is you shall not have other gods besides me the second is you shall not make for yourself an idol nor any likeness Etc close quote again nothing at all nefarious is going on none of the imperatives in the text are being removed and there isn’t any sort of thinking here that natural law is mutable there’s not numbering in the Hebrew manuscripts the actual imperatives have to be recognized and then some work has to be done on our part however Dr Jennings I would highly

Advise you to not rely on Doc on Doug bachelor’s propaganda website sabbathtruth.com which has gone around and quot minded all sorts of sources not even paying attention to what they’re pulling from because Tim made the same error that Doug Bachelor did when I had to correct him on this last year this is the exact quote that Dr Jennings put up on his slide only he omitted the last sentence that’s in red and what does it say quote the church talking about the Roman Catholic Church on the other hand after changing the day of rest from The Jewish Sabbath or the seventh day of the

Week to the first made the third commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord’s Day the Council of Trent condemns those who deny that the Ten Commandments are binding on Christians close quote the Council of Trent condemns what those that deny all Ten Commandments are binding on Christians so on the one hand they’ll cite this to try and say see they even admit that the Pope changed the Sabbath they read into the phrase the church and think the Roman Catholic Church is saying the pope did this they aren’t they mean the apostles but at the same time they’ll

Cite it and leave off that last sentence when trying to talk about the Roman Catholic Church changing the law removing some of the Ten Commandments Etc it is so dishonest and just so it’s clear they’re all getting this from the same places folks I’ve heard Adventists repeat this till they’re blue in the face they all make the same errors every single time showing that they haven’t even gone to these sources themselves they’re just repeating what they’ve heard from everybody else here’s Doug bachelor’s Sabbath truth propaganda site where they all get this from and

Omit that last sentence as you can see because it would refute the claim that they removed some of the Ten Commandments or have done away with some of them Etc but they cite it in this article which is trying to give a historical argument for why the Sabbath was changed and they very clearly omit that last sentence to try and say look the Roman Catholic Church even admits they changed the Sabbath I will explain how they’re abusing these claims in a moment but I get so tired of seeing people within this movement just outright lie about Roman Catholicism and

Protestants that paired with lazy research Adventists need to seriously stop parting the bad homework of other sdas which misrepresent those they are critical of it’s always the exact same quotes exact same sources never more of the quote the same use of the wrong page numbers the same use of the of the the faulty typos dead giveaway they’re all recycling a single person’s homework who went and deceptively selected the citations and omitted things that proed the sources are being abused commandment keeping Church though yeah the Roman Catholic Church didn’t

Change the law because they see it as an arbitrary list of mutable commands which is Dr Jennings Central thesis here to begin building his case that the investigative judgment needs to be reimagined and can be salvaged but not if you have this faulty view of the atonement being legal the Roman Catholic Church teaches that all 10 commandments are binding upon people yes including the second commandment regarding idolatry you you can disagree with how they Define such and argue over that but this silly rhetoric that they change the law to allow for idolatry which is how

They justify invocation of Saints and the Maran doctrines give me a break give me a break I’m so sick of hearing this engage with what they actually teach not conspiracy in bad faith and I understand not all Adventists do this but this irks me this irks me this is why I’m so heavy on sources here Adventists complain all the time I’m misrepresenting I’m this I’m that give me a break give me a break but this Segways us into Daniel 7:25 which Dr Jennings and the SDA Church Point to as their primary biblical support piece for all of this and like we saw in the new Catholic

Encyclopedia they state that the church changed the day of worship so that’s supposed to prove it right yeah not so fast I have a running policy on this platform that anytime I hear this specific misrepresentation on principle I will correct it okay if you’re going to critique any theological framework I don’t care whose it is you have to first understand the way the model is using language otherwise it’s pointless it’s why for example I showed earlier what the SDA Church means by the word atonement I don’t just assume they mean something and then start arguing

That it’s why I’m constantly saying that definitions matter when it comes to really unraveling aous Theology and understanding it this is something I take very seriously well the same is true when analyzing what what the Roman Catholic Church teaches regarding their claims to quote unquote change the Sabbath when they say the church changed the Sabbath or the church changed the day of worship Adventists insert the pope into the phrase the church yeah that’s not what they’re saying that’s not what they’re saying the Roman Catholic Church claims that their institutional hierarchy goes

Back to the apostles namely Peter specifically for the papacy when they say the church in this context they are saying the apostles they claim the apostles instituted corporate Worship On the first day not the pope they make a distinction as well between the Law’s ceremonial form and its substance I talk about this all the time and don’t do this silly guilt by association genetic fallacy where it’s like well the Roman Catholic Church teaches it so therefore yeah they’re not wrong about everything right about a lot more than the Adventist Church that’s

For sure just shows you hav actually study what they believe because you’ve inherited some of their beliefs whether you understand this or not they recognize that the substance of the fourth Commandment has not changed and will not change and I’m going to show you the receipts on this in a minute we’re going to get into Thomas assuma a qual qualified or in their case I guess the Sabbath would be numbered as the the third commandment not the fourth Commandment hence why the Council of Trent says they condemn those who deny that all Ten Commandments are binding

Upon Christians okay we’re going to get a little bit you’re G to have to really pay attention here folks there’s a reason I don’t get into a lot of scholasticism and stuff on this channel even though I love the reformed Scholastics the medieval Scholastics like Thomas Etc but it’s because it it’s it can get a pretty weighty but we have to look at this now okay we’re going to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that Dr Jennings has no clue what he’s talking about because he’s just parting information that he got from these other propaganda sites who also haven’t read

This stuff I guarantee you the person that wrote sabbathtruth.com those articles all the varying people on there I guarantee you those individuals have not read Thomas assuma guarantee it Thomas is a qualified Roman Catholic Source on this for those new to this yes Thomas was a Roman Catholic Theologian know that doesn’t mean he was automatically wrong or deceived in everything that he said my purpose inciting him is to show how this notion that the Roman Catholic Church is attacking the Sabbath change the Ten Commandments is fiction it’s a myth it’s not

Real and it shows that one doesn’t even have a cursory level reading of the doctors in the Roman Church the Suma is Thomas’s most famous theological work it’s one of the most influential writings in Christian philosophy and theology in the west It Was Written in the Middle Ages or what what church historians would call the the high Middle Ages the late 1200s and it’s broken into three parts which has significantly shaped present Roman Catholic theology this is from article three in part two regarding whether all the moral precepts of the Old Law are reducible to the 10 precepts

Of the decalog and he’s dealing with objections that then follow his responses to those objections that’s how it’s written here’s an objection here’s the response to the objection so here are the first two objections that he presents followed by his responses to them quote objection one it would seem that not all the moral precepts of the Old Law are reducible to the 10 precepts of the decalog for the first and principal precepts of the law are Thou shalt love the Lord thy God and thou shalt love thy neighbor as stated in Matthew 2237 through 39 but these two were not contained in

The precepts of the decalogue therefore not all the moral precepts are contained in the precepts of the decalogue that’s objection one so Thomas is going to disagree with these objections he’s going to give responses objection two further the moral precepts are not reducible to the ceremonial precepts but rather vice versa but among the precepts of the decalogue one is ceremonial example remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day therefore the moral precepts are not reducible to all the precepts of the decalogue close quote so before moving forward

Adventist Thomas is responding to the objection that nine of the Ten Commandments are moral but the Sabbath isn’t sound familiar he’s arguing the same thing you guys do you should appreciate him he is making a Biblical case against the idea that the Sabbath isn’t moral long before your movement even existed he then gives his responses to these object to OB where first he writes quote I answer that the precepts of the decalog differ from the other precepts of the law in the fact that God himself is said to have given the precepts of the decalogue

Whereas he gave the other precepts to the people through Moses sound familiar Adventist friend for those that don’t know adven say this all the time yet how many of them would condemn Thomas to the pit of Hell just because he’s a Roman Catholic sorry wherefore the decalogue includes those precepts the knowledge of which man has immediately from God ah it’s written on the conscience Romans 2 such are those which with but slight reflection can be gathered at once from the first general principles and those also which become known to man immediately through divinely infused

Faith consequently two kinds of precepts are not recog among the precepts of the decalogue first general principles for they need no further promulgation after being once imprinted on the natural reason to which they are self-evident that’s just a fancy way of him reiterating Romans 2 like we saw as for instance that one should do evil to no man and other similar principles and again those which the careful reflection of Wise Men shows to be in accord with reason since the people receive these principles from God though being taught by wise men nevertheless both kinds of precepts

Are contained in the precepts of the decalogue yet in different ways for the first general principles are contained in them as principles in their proximate conclusions while those which are known through wise men are contained conversely as conclusions in their principles close quote so before moving forward guess what s Adventist Thomas here is explaining the unique status of the decalogue compared to the other laws in the Old Testament sound familiar because Thomas is the one who systematized that word does not mean originated by the way there’s some

Adventists that confuse the I’ve heard this numerous times I’ve read articles where they say this Etc systematized does not mean originated remember that carile quote that we read earlier ambro Aster talks about this I have ambro Aster’s commentary on Romans and he does he makes a three-fold distinction when when commentating on the book that’s long before Thomas almost a thousand years before Thomas but Thomas is the one who systematized the three-fold distinction between the moral ceremonial and civil law and his argument is that the Ten Commandments are unique because God

Himself gave them directly to the people unlike other laws that were communicated by God through Moses and he argues that the decalogue contains moral precepts that are immediately known to humans either through natural reason aka the conscience or what Thomas calls divinely infused faith meaning they are a part of natural law the created order they transcend Moses he’s advocating for the exact same thing the Adventist Church does in this regard this is a doctor of the Roman Catholic Church friend not a Joe Schmo now notice two of his other replies where he speaks about the

Sabbath commandment so reply to objection one he G an he gives an overview General rebuttal and now he gives specific replies to the objections so what was objection one when somebody says it would seem that not all the moral precepts of the Old Law are reducible to the 10 because well Jesus said the whole law is summarized by love for God and love for neighbor and that’s not found in the 10 to which Thomas says quote those two principles are the first general principles of the natural law and are self-evident to human reason either through nature or through faith

Wherefore all the precepts of the decalog are referred to these as conclusions to general principles AKA well I I don’t want to Sidetrack on that I could have a lot to say on that but notice reply to objection two the precept of the Sabbath observance is moral in one respect in so far as it commands man to give some time to the things of God according to Psalm 4610 be still and see that I am God in this respect it is placed among the precepts of the decalog but not as to the fixing of the time in which respect it is a cereem monial precept close

Quote so Thomas didn’t make didn’t even make an exception for the Sabbath commandment not being moral but that the others are no he taught and believed that all 10 are moral but that there is a substantive difference between the ceremonial form of the Sabbath commandment meaning the way that it’s walked out and observed and practiced versus the actual substance of the command itself the moral aspect is that it commands people to dedicate time to God which is a universal principle I.E Psalm 4610 the specific requirement to observe the seventh day

Saturday is ceremonial in nature the substance is transcendent the cere the ceremonial form is not I talk about this all the time because the form Scholastics built upon and inherited this from Thomas and Thomas wasn’t wrong he was correct in his observation the ceremonial form of the fourth Commandment specifically changes throughout Redemptive history Just Between the first and second giving of the law and just like the rest of natural law is transcendent days are not Transcendent they’re not Eternal that’s a part of the ceremonial aspect of the

Law so Tim Jennings is wrong because Thomas is an accurate spokesperson for Roman Catholic teaching even if you don’t agree with him especially late medieval teaching which is supposed to be man we’re like way past when this whole concept of the laws understanding has changed to this malleable Imperial sort of thing and Thomas is arguing that an aspect of the Sabbath is a part of natural law which is unchanging or design law as Tim Jennings has referred to it I said I’ve talked about this a lot regarding the Sabbath because it just it totally decimates the

Aous understanding of the Sabbath folks but I haven’t utilized Thomas because it will cause some people unfortunately to just dismiss him because he was Roman Catholic but this is spoton there is a ceremonial form of the Sabbath Commandment that can change and a moral aspect that cannot change the ceremonial can change because it’s not built into nature it’s not hardwired it’s not uh en encoded into the actual DNA the moral aspect is and ultimately at its core the Sabbath is about the gospel which is why the seven amist Church doesn’t actually keep the Sabbath

They think because they go to church on Saturday they keep the Sabbath no Frank you guys are like Israel wandering around out in the wilderness in the desert of life where you think you’ve entered in because you’re observance of of Shadows and types and ceremony but just like them if you don’t believe you’re not going to enter in and you’re going to perish and you’re going to die out in the wilderness but that is the Roman Catholic position in this area which is why that was my whole point in citing that an actual official primary source most of the sources folks that people

Site in this area that abist cite in this area look they said they changed the Sabbath they’re not even authoritative it’s a random priest or a cardinal somewhere that said something now that doesn’t make it an official primary source Thomas assuma is a primary source he’s a doctor in the Roman Catholic Church look up what that means he’s a doctor in the Roman Church okay he’s not just a priest so I’m sorry but Dr Jennings just does not know what he’s talking about in this area or any other Adventist for that matter who makes the claim that the

Roman Catholic Church degrades The Ten Commandments removes some of the Commandments hates the Sabbath Etc I’m sorry miss me with that it just patently false get new arguments so to any Adventist that hears this before slandering Roman Catholicism you should be grateful for Thomas aquinus work in this area of the three-fold division of of the law and for providing some of the best biblical defenses for such as well as some of the strongest biblical and rational arguments in favor of all Ten Commandments being moral in nature thirdly the vast majority of quotes that

You’ll hear Adventist site regarding them changing the Sabbath are post-reformation statements they are Roman Catholic responses to the Protestant Reformation and this matters remember I’m addressing here these charges that look they even admit that they changed the Sabbath and they’ll point to these quotes and not understand what’s being said they’re not saying the pope did this they’re not saying the Commandments can change and have changed Etc the moral commands natural law Etc but thirdly these statements are post-reformation and this matters because in this discussion the

Subject of apostolic succession is one that is Paramount and the Roman Catholic Church’s reasoning goes as follows if the apostles instituted the first day of corporate worship and the reformers broke away from that institution that Jesus instituted with the apostles I.E the Roman Catholic Church then Protestants have no basis for first day corporate worship especially considering that no text in scripture verbatim says such make sense you got the reasoning if it was instituted by the apostle and the reformers broke away from the apostles then Protestants have no basis

For what the apostles established that’s the reasoning in the argument which is why if you read John Calvin’s institutes L uh uh Martin kemet’s on this and his response to Trent all these varying things where they’re going back and forth on this the topic of apostolic succession ends up getting naturally brought up because that’s what’s going on here but with the reformed in particular which is the tradition I’m a part of that’s who some of these quotes are specifically levied at and the Roman Catholic Church is arguing against What’s called the regulative principle

Of worship the regulative principle is the belief that corporate worship should only contain that which is prescribed in scripture which is why we don’t use icons or images and fog machines and laser lights Etc so since this is the case the Roman Catholic church has argued that since reformed Christians affirm solos scriptura as well as the regulative principle of worship we therefore have no basis for corporate first day worship because there’s no biblical text that explicitly says to worship that day see the argument I obviously don’t agree with

The argument but I’m trying to steal man and present to you the reasoning that’s the context of a lot of these quotes that Adventists site where Rome makes these claims about Protestants having no basis for corporate first day worship because they changed the day of worship to the first day and then the reformed have their arguments and we go back and forth on these things and the rest is history but the point being the Roman Catholic Church is not claiming what Adventists claim they are full stop Adventists are citing quotes that they don’t understand the backstory and

Context of and are then importing into those quotes their Adventist presuppositions such as the pope changing the Sabbath because that’s what Ellen White claimed to be shown in Vision if you’re an Adventist please please please stop doing this it’s not moving the conversation forward it’s like the bad evangelic it’s not just Adventists it’s like the bad evangelicals too who who just they mean well I get it I get it but it’s exhausting stop with these bad arguments it just it it’s embarrassing it is embarrassing please if you continue to do so after

Hearing this you are a dishonest person and you don’t have integrity because you can make legitimate arguments against Roman Catholic theology without straw Manning and misrepresenting them to try and bolster your own view if you have to do that you evidence your position is weak same goes for your arguments against Protestant prots too learn what people actually believe go to the sources yourself as it pertains to Daniel 7:25 now the rest of the night could be spent on this because he tried to say we all know the history Daniel 7 and the the the

Little horn changed the law and yeah the latter half of Daniel 7 which includes verse 25 is a prophecy of the church is suffering under oppressive rulers the little horn and Dan’s Prophecy with rulers particularly Roman Caesars who waged open war against the church and were on a crusade to extinguish her but failed this is interconnected with the understanding that that the church is Christ Kingdom the changing of times and laws is the Caesar’s attempt to overthrow Christ’s Kingdom the church which is also how it can have present day application to us mind you

And every subsequent generation be before us which is similar to the overarching message of Revelation which as Adventists are aware Daniel is intimately connected with Revelation the modern application is the reminder that Jesus is overcome he’s ruling and reigning his kingdom will continue advancing leading to the consummation of the ages but Tim said he thinks the change there is referring to the way people see or understand the law not the actual changing of the day so it’s the Warped understanding of God’s character because remember when they talk about God’s law they’re also

Talking about his character and his government all those terms are synonymous in this model great controversy Satan began attacking the Ten Commandments and it’s actually that the character of God has been maligned because they think this law is Imperial and it’s all this stuff it’s all built on this same fundamentally flawed Foundation interesting take but I’d argue even that’s flawed because Christians have always believed in design law or natural law that’s not even what’s in focus in Daniel 7 it’s just word association or word concept fallacy on his

Part opening that can of worms all of Daniel 7 would require getting into prophetic School of interpretation and why One Superior over against another is uus the first church historian and notice what he writes with the Roman Empire monarchy had come on Earth as the image of the monarchy in heaven you understand what that says the the imperial system that crucified Christ is now Christianity this is the Christian first Christian historian not World historian Christian church historian is telling us that God runs his government like Caesar runs Rome this is Lindsay’s uh book on

History of the Reformation it says the Great Men Who Built the western church were almost all trained Roman lawyers chulian cyprian Augustine Gregory the Great whose writings formed the bridge between the Latin fathers and schoolmen were all men whose early training had been that of Roman lawyer a training which molded and shaped all their thinking whether theological or ecclesiastical they instinctively regarded all questions as a great Roman lawyer would they had the lawyer’s cravings for exact definitions that the lawyer’s idea that the primary Duty laid

Upon them was to enforce obedience to Authority whether that Authority expressed itself in external institutions or in the precise definitions of the correct ways of thinking about spiritual truth you know the thought police these are the doctrines these are the Creeds these are the 28 fundamentals you better adhere to them no branch of Western christiandom has been able to free itself from the spell cast upon it by these Roman lawyers of the early centuries of the Christian Church imperialism God’s laws like our law and when you break our law Justice

Requires the ruling Authority must punish and there must be accounting there must be a record in some record book of all the sins and those sins have to have some payment made for them and there’s some has to be some time in history when the judge will go in and look at the records and see who’s been paid and who’s not been paid the entire investigative judgment has been corrupted by Imperial law which is not God’s law Psalm 711 God is a righteous judge and a God who feels indignation Every Day psalm 50:6 the heavens declare his righteousness for God himself is Judge

Isaiah 33:22 for the Lord is our judge the Lord is our lawgiver the Lord is our King he will save us Ezekiel 18:30 therefore I will judge you oh House of Israel everyone according to his ways declares the Lord God repent and turn from all your transgressions lest iniquity be your ruin Dr Jennings the Bible is what presents God in this way and uses this type of language the issue isn’t the legal aspect of sin or recognizing the legal framework that God has revealed about himself through scripture such as that he’s a judge and the judge isn’t the one on

Trial folks SDA theology has it entirely Twisted that God is the one on trial the problem is the investigative judgment in Adventist theology not the not the legal language in the Bible he said we’ve got it all twisted Ellen White got it all twisted then sir that’s where this is primarily coming from your church is informing this teaching based on her commentary on such and she claimed to get this directly direct Revelation from God on this stuff these the Neo Adventist folks have got to know they’ve got to know that this is just a death blow to the system

That just twisting things and you’re he’s saying white got this wrong that’s what he’s saying he didn’t word it that way but that’s what he’s essentially that’s the the conclusion of what he’s saying the investigative judgment has been inflicted with this and warped by this Oh you mean God through Ellen White okay the fact that the Bible speaks this way about God and His dealing with sin and Justice doesn’t necessitate the investigative judgment and all the problematic details that he presented that there’s a list of of sins and a record books

And that that if it’s that well if there if it’s legal that would require God examining the books like how the investigative judgment Doctrine claims folks Paul had a legal background and he penned most the new testament which is why like I showed earlier he himself in Colossians 2 equates sin with debt and explains how our sins being placed on Christ at the cross can out that debt that stood against us which is legal language the word itself is a legal term go look it up kogon it’s only used one place in the whole Bible and it literally is a legal

Term but more importantly I hinted at this or or said a little bit about this you know just a second ago but I just want to reiterate he just admitted that Ellen White is a false prophet that didn’t actually receive re Visions she didn’t receive the vision she claimed to receive apparently because he said an imperial idea and understanding of the law has infected the investigative judgment yet it’s the Adventist propheus who claim to be shown this Invision so maybe Tim is one of these Adventists that rejects Ellen White I don’t know he’s an Adventist

Light wouldn’t Shock Me with the Neo Adventist crowd but it’s a perfect example of how any sort of deviation from Adventist Orthodoxy actually nullifies the validity of adventism because Orthodox Adventist theology demands that all of it be true including what Ellen White put forth regarding the investigative judgment or the system collapses and adventism unique identity becomes nullified which is why so many Adventists think that what Tim is teaching is an infiltration into their movement and that he’s a deceiver leading people away from present

Truth but I’ll tell you what’s fascinating about all this is that I decided to do some digging on Tim’s claims here and notice what I

Found so you can go to character of good.com character ofg good.com a website that’s run by an Adventist guy which puts forth The Identical thing that Tim is saying using the exact same sources every single one of them notice what he writes this individual quote Under The Heading a change to God’s law but this truth was lost and another concept of law replaced it romanism Imperial Rome’s concept of government and law infected Christian thought after the emperor Constantine converted prior to Constantine’s conversion Christianity understood God’s

Law as the law of Love Therefore love is the Fulfillment of the law ah and then the proof text that Tim has been using but after Constantine’s conversion which should say conversion or sorry but after Constantine converted the Christian Church accepted Rome’s change to God’s law and what was that change that God’s law is an imposed law with no inherent consequence thus requiring the lawgiver to police breaches in the law and inflict punishment rather than the truth that God’s law is the natural law of love the design protocol on which God created

Life to operate eus the first church historian documented clearly how Christianity exchanged God’s law of love for an imposed Roman construct quote there are no reserves in this in the styled ionium with which yeus closes his history no wistful regret for the blessings of persecution no prophetic fear of Imperial control of the church his heart is full of gratitude to God and Constantine and it’s not only his feelings that are stirred he’s ready with a theory indeed a Theology of the Christian Empire or Emperor he finds a correspondence between religion and

Politics with the Roman Empire monarchy had come on Earth as the image of the monarchy in heaven and then what quote do we see the same one that that Dr Jennings just cited Thomas Lindsay in his book a history of the Reformation describes this infection in Christian thought this way same thing terlan cyprian Augustine Gregory yada yada but so because yeus documents down that the Roman monarchy was a picture of Heaven on Earth which is what he’s getting at if you go read it that proves that Christianity supposedly exchanged God’s law of love for an imposed Roman

Construct I challenge anyone to go in and read this from yeus okay it’s in his book life of Constantine Yus was a historian that was his primary strength he did some commentary type type stuff but his his accolades are in church history this is not what yeus is saying in this quote this is another case of them taking statements that they don’t understand and reading into them ideas that are not being being conveyed yeus saw Constantine as a divinely appointed ruler whose monarchy mired the Heavenly Kingdom you have to put yourself in the shoes of these individuals don’t read

Them anachronistically from 2025 and then like try and make him look like he he’s of today he’s not let them be what they are let the fathers be the fathers let yeus be Yus this is coming from his historical work so the general claimed that yes yeus believed that Constantine was divinely appointed and this is because you’re talking about years of persecution of the church brutal persecution you know AVST want to talk about being persecuted for going to church on Saturday yeah read yeus is documenting down of what was taking place around 70 AD okay real

Persecution aanus the great persecution this is from his historical work that he’s talking about here life of Constantine where he presents Constantine’s reign as a fulfillment of divine order suggesting basically that Earthly monarchy should reflect Heavenly monarchy again this was years after severe persecution so he saw this as this amazing look at this Turning Point thing where we go from Diocesan and all these persecutions leading to the actual Emperor being converted and Christianity becoming legal ized however however uus does not argue or claim that

Christians transitioned from viewing God’s law as love to an imperialistic framework contextually he was focused on legitimizing Constantine’s Rule and the integration of the church with the Roman state not on a theological shift regarding the nature of God’s law so while he may reflect on intertwining of Christian theology with Imperial Authority I.E the church and the state this does not support the claim that he advocated a move from a love-based understanding of God’s law to one characterized by imperialism because it’s malleable and it can change and all

This other stuff so you cus is being abused and twisted to sound like he’s saying what this theory is claiming he isn’t he’s not documenting down that this led to Christians to go from seeing God’s law of love to one of imperialism this is the great controversy worldview coloring the lines for them where they see youus mention God’s government which what does that mean in the Adventist mind the law The Ten Commandments God’s character Ellen White synonymously used those phrases God’s government to refer to those things she synonymously used God’s

Government to refer to the Ten Commandments the law Etc That’s what Satan began attacking was God’s government are you connecting the dots this worldview is coloring the quote for them so because the Roman Empire was an imperial one and Constantine is talking uh about the the or or or Yus is talking about the government of Heaven breaking into the government on Earth they think something’s being said that isn’t yeus didn’t have a great controversy worldview it wasn’t even talking about Christian understanding of the law and and and it being changed but guess what

Folks guess what it doesn’t end there because here’s Tim Jennings website after going to character ofg good.com which for all I know maybe that is Tim Jennings own separate website some second website I don’t know but I then went to come andreas.com and guess what he took this same article from character ofg god.com identically so same sources everything verbatim with what we saw previously regarding the Catholic encyclopedia there’s youus Thomas Lindsay I mean Franks up here with what we saw previously regarding the Catholic encyclopedia I’m not even convinced that Dr Jennings has

Read the sources that he’s citing to understand what’s even being said he’s just recycling all these same sources and statements that they all use and they got from each other going back to one individual somewhere Daniel 7:25 has nothing to do with the papacy or the converted Christian Roman Empire changing the understanding of God’s law from being a law of Love or design into a mutable Imperial list of Dos and do not restrictions that are changeable but notice what Tim actually says in this article on his website from the one that was just on screen

Okay what we were looking at is act from the preface of his own paraphrase of the Bible like I mentioned earlier the remedy yes he has his own Bible paraphrase and if you think the Blurred word aka the clear word was bad yeah go check this one out but in the preface of that paraphrase this is what he writes right after utilizing that same Thomas Lindsay quote quote Christians lost sight of God’s law of love and instead accepted an imposed law system modeled after human governments ah just like he said in the presentation earlier after all if they still believed

God’s law was the designed law of Love Like The Law of respiration there it is again then would they ever have thought a church committee could vote to change such a law something the church did vote in committee to do but they could only vote to change God’s law after they first accepted the concept that his law is imposed not natural this idea of an imposed law altered the view of uh the view of God held by Christians and changed how Christianity functioned thus Christians went from a body of believers who lived communally shared their possessions to help each

Other and died as Martyrs to an organization of Crusades Inquisition burning denters at the stake and active participation in genocide Nazis in Germany and Christians in Wanda close quote so the Inquisition and the Crusades were a result of Christian lawyers like like tulan St Augustine St cyprian coming from a legal background and influencing the way that the law should be understood for the Christian and just like in that character of god.com article he cited Thomas Lindsay to support this along with the cus so so before tulan and Augustine cyprian Etc in the third through fifth

Centuries Christians had an understanding of God’s law as one of love but then these Giants of the Christian faith they came along and distorted all that they distorted the character of God these these lawyers but this could only happen after it was first accepted that God’s law is imposed and not what natural yeah what Tim is sharing here is historical fiction folks I’m sorry but if you’re an Adventist that has fallen for this my advice would be to go and get a refund go get your lunch money back but then he continues pay very close attention because we’re getting to

The heart of the matter quote sadly by the time the Bible was eventually translated into the language of the people the imposed law construct was deeply ingrained Orthodoxy essentially all Bible translations have been done by people operating through the lens of imposed the law what this means is that Bible translations artificially introduce imposed law with fear inducing ideas about God this Bible paraphrase offers an alternative my bias is that God is the creator Builder and designer and when he constructed his Universe he built it to operate in harmony with his own nature

Of Love thus God’s law is not a set of imposed rules but the design parameters on which he built life to exist close quote so ditch every other actual Bible translation and trade it out for Tim’s paraphrase which isn’t even a translation but is a paraphrase that funnels the Bible through an extra biblical Paradigm called the Great controversy theme entirely unknown until a woman in the 19th century claimed to be shown Visions from God through which this Paradigm supposedly claim or or came he continues the remedy is an expanded Bible paraphrase in which interpretation

Is filtered through through the lens of God’s design law of love the template on which life is built this paraphrase is intentional in its focus to reorient the Christian mind to God’s character of love and his mission to heal and restore humankind as taught by the early church close quote but there at the end we have the code words so ditch your actual Bible translation which supposedly has a bent against natural law and seeing God’s true character and Trad it in for Tim Jennings paraphrase which isn’t even a translation and is filtered through the great controversy

Lens go check this thing out folks a total Onslaught butchering of the Bible yeah yeah but this is the same fault narrative that he mentioned at the beginning of his presentation that early Christians basically looked like Adventists because they had Selfless Love which was a result of them having the correct understanding of God’s character but then the big bad Roman Catholic church and Constantine came along and warped that understanding and now there’s a false understanding and Satan was ultimately behind it because this war started in heaven where he was

Attacking God’s character the same stuff we hear and see from other Neo Adventists who still promote the idea that God is on trial and his character is in question but they don’t like various other aspects that make up the aous system of theology so they try and repackage those parts or in some instances just outright reject them but at the end of the day this reimagining by Jennings is still the same theological dumpster fire it’s still coming from the same unbiblical Adventist worldview and faulty understanding that God his law his character they’re on trial Etc

It all goes back to that that’s why I’m constantly bringing this up that’s now we’re found in the Bible that Satan prior to Earth’s existence began attacking the Ten Commandments and telling Angels you don’t need any government self-governance is the best government and he tried to seek his own government so God had to hold a council meeting and they decided they permit it to happen because if God just blotted him out it would confirm Satan’s claims to the angels and seow seeds of doubt in their mind none of this crap is in the Bible that’s what it is it is crap and

If you think that word is bad you need to go look at what Paul said when he talked about scoon I’m not going to say what that word is but go check it out for yourself if you think crap is bad because that’s what this stuff is it’s from the dung pile of theology the Bible is what uses legal imagery to reveal certain realities Dr Jennings I understand you don’t like this I understand some a lot of people don’t it’s not just him but it’s not because of Christian lawyers in history imposing such a view on the Bible not the pope not the Roman Catholic Church not Christians who

Distorted and warped the character of God and his law by retrofitting a legal idea into the Bible the Bible itself uses legal wording and imagery to convey certain realities none of that necessitates the investigative judgment though the the problem is not the legality of sin or God’s law the issue is the investigative judgment and adventism instead of claiming everyone else ruined things which borders on conspiracy just just apply William aam’s Razer which very clearly points to adventism novel theology being the problem not everyone else but hey may

Maybe aam’s razor is again is you know aam was a part of the the the medieval Scholastics so maybe we can’t use that either because that’s tainted by reason and and these sorts of things but the the early church did not have a great controversy worldview which is in formed shaped and framed by the writings of elen white I’ve shown the sources on this enough at this point there’s no need to unpack that again Daniel prophesied I watched the horn was Waging War against the Saints and defeating them we were losing the war until till the ancient a came and

Pronounced judgment in favor of the Saints well what kind of war is this what kind of War notice what it says in Cor thians 2 Corinthians 10 3-5 for though we live in the world we do not wage war as the world does the weapons we use they’re not worldly they have divine power to demolish strongholds what do we demolish we demolish arguments and every pretention that sets itself up against now here’s the core issue in the war the knowledge of God and take captive every thought to Jesus Christ now if you’re in a battle in a war over knowledge arguments pretensions and thoughts

Where’s the battlefield the battlefield your mind and the war Satan is the father of lies and Hees get you to believe lies we’re going to go into that this afternoon how lies actually affect your neural circuitry and your brain structure as he gets you to believe lies he exerts power of you that’s why Jesus said the truth will set you free exactly we’re in a war that centers over the knowledge of god wow okay so once again another textbook example of this movement not utilizing the historical grammatical method of Bible interpretation despite the leadership

Insisting that’s the only approved hermeneutic Tim engaged in word concept or word association fallacy he took the word War found in Daniel 7 and then jumped to 2 Corinthians 10 where the same word is used and tried to make some sort of interpretive Cory between the two so notice his reasoning he cited Daniel 721 through 22 and said Daniel prophesied that the horn and focus waged war against the Saints and was defeating them and we were losing the war until the Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the Saints then he asked well what kind of war is this to

Define such he hopscotched over to 2 Corinthians 10 found the word war and said the battlefield is the mind and we’re in a war that centers on the knowledge of God aka the character of God is being attacked by Satan and God is on trial and needs Vindicated from these attacks and for those who may think I’m nitpicking here no I’m not He is building his case here and like we’re going to see in part two he’s going to get more specifically into his reinterpretation of this this is his setting the stage and the and the foundation to build upon well if that’s

Cracked and flawed this whole thing falls apart this is the same great controversy world view packaged in a different skin folks same stuff we hear from all the other Neo Adventist types who are always talking about pop psychology that the real problem is man has a distorted picture in his mind of the character of God and that’s the real problem and that’s why they’re hostile to him so if we can get you know if we can remedy that and AD can just change people’s perspect P perception of who God actually is that’s what will result in people coming to him now that that’s

Not man’s problem that that’s not man’s problem the unregenerate man’s problem is he is a hater of God cannot do any good cannot seek for God is actively hostile toward him loves his sin suppresses the truth and unrighteousness is born in in dead in sins and trespasses doesn’t come to the light because he knows it will expose his sin and so on those are all biblical claims explicit statements in scripture about the unregenerate man and why he needs to be born again he doesn’t need a pop psychology lesson to try and put a new image in the unregenerate person’s

Mind about who God is but I want to look at how the Bible was abused here because Tim crossed wires and if you aren’t paying close enough attention it makes sense why a person could think his conclusion was valid cuz he’s just rattling through the stuff and I get it you know he’s doing a presentation Etc Daniel 7: 21-22 and 2 Corinthians 10 3-5 are only related in the sense that both passages speak about conflict and victory but they address entirely different contexts and types of battles so it’s a superficial appeal why I said he engaged in in a

Form of word concept fallacy Daniel 7: 21-22 is describing a vision where a horn representative of an oppressive power not going to get into arguing what what power but that power makes war against the Saints and prevails until God intervenes giving the Saints Victory and then pronounces a judgment in their favor this is an eschatological prophecy about persecution and God’s ultimate Justice which is somewhat ironic given Tim’s objection to legal and law type language regarding judgment nevertheless 2 Corinthians 10 is is talking about spiritual warfare where

Paul explains that believers do not fight using physical weapons but instead use divine power to destroy arguments and strongholds that oppose the knowledge of God fting deception and and falsehood with truth so both passages are addressing conflict involving God’s people but Daniel 7 focuses on external persecution and God vindicating his people from that persecution not himself or his character while 2 Corinthians 10 focuses on spiritual warfare and a battle against false ideas yet when Tim asked what kind of war is Daniel 7 referring to he appealed

To 2 Corinthians 10 3 through five to Define such no Daniel 7 is talking about external conflict 2 Corinthians 10 is talking about spiritual warfare against false ideologies Daniel 7’s not talking about to battle over knowledge arguments pretensions and thoughts in the mind and a false understanding of God’s character see the issue the context of the two is not the same and they definitely don’t prove that God and his character are on trial because of Satan and now God has to vindicate himself from these accusations which is the underlaying Assumption in

The driver’s seat of Dr Jennings that he’s operating on remember what Tim is seeking to do here he’s building the case for his unique reimagining of the investigative judgment he thinks Orthodox SDA teaching in this area is flawed because it Embraces this Imperial understanding of the law that the Christian Church allegedly adopted which has set the teaching forth in a legal fearful framework over and against a loving natural design sense and along the way he tried using Daniel 7 and 2 Corinthians 10 as a support piece to build up the foundational idea that God

And his love are on trial because love is a part of his character so far this presentation is built on sinking sand this wasn’t a sound handling of the Bible and it definitely wasn’t an application of the historical grammatical method you have to be on the lookout for fallacious reasoning like this that can appear to be biblical since similar wording is being used and the Bible is being appealed to but this was not sound hermeneutic it was a support piece in this larger edifice he is he is seeking to build to make it seem biblical along the way now in part two we will see how he

Brings this faulty Foundation to the doctrine of the investigative judgment itself and begins to flesh out an entirely novel understanding of such and we’ll get into the finer specifics of his reimagining of the investigative judgment but the point of part one was this that at the end of the day folks Tim Jennings still has a great controversy worldview that he is pushing no differently than any other abous leader it is still the same poisonous roote despite his departure from SDA Orthodoxy as a Neo Adventist he’s still promoting the same product that the SDA

Church is trying to sell us on he just uses a different approach to do so different packaging they all do it it is the theological lipstick on a pig approach you’ve got some folks out there they’re just going to show you the pig here it is you need to accept it the others they’re like oh man that pig has some mud on it let’s slap some lipstick on it that’ll do the trick the mud is still there friends that the mud is still there this is the same approach we see with other Neo Adventist types like Ty Gibson and his ministry lightbe who we’ve listened to before what is

Lightbearer tagline remember we looked at it the last time we look well no it wasn’t the last time one of the previous times we looked at Ty Gibson they State on their website that their mission is to vindicate the beauty of God’s character that’s the central big idea if you will of the Adventist Church’s extra biblical worldview that comes from Ellen White not the Bible and it revolves around the idea that before the Earth even existed Satan began attacking the Ten Commandments in heaven and now God is on trial and the Earth and human beings were created with this controversy over

The Ten Commandments God’s government already underway with the goal being that Adam and Eve would vindicate God by keeping the law perfectly AKA his government which would silence Satan but they failed which made it appear like Satan had the victory but the Son of God then offered to come after a council meeting at the risk of Eternal loss I’ve heard people like Doug Bachelor say that yeah Jesus could have failed and if he would have it would have been Eternal division in god wow the things some of them will say it’s like do you stop to think before

You talk dude but the Son of God offered to come at the risk of Eternal loss to do what Adam failed to do and proed to Fallen humans that the law can be kept it can’t change and with God’s help you can keep the law and prove Satan’s a liar inside with Jesus in the great controversy and in that model that’s what Redemptive history is all about allegedly the Ten Commandments being Vindicated Satan being proven to be a liar God is on trial none of that is biblical and I’m sorry administ friend if you believe that you have it backwards you’re not the judge

Friend you have it completely backwards your you’re not the judge and if you don’t understand that I’ve got bad news for you it’s time to really start thinking these things through friend some of y’all have been with me a long time years you know that this stuff is stirring within you it’s time it’s time it’s time to give this up I know it’s difficult I get it it’s time to give this mess up and come be a Christian they bring this concept to the Bible from Ellen White’s writings it’s already accepted as valid from that point it’s then brought to the Bible to

Then try and find ways to make it appear like the Bible supports it and it’s why a lot of these Neo Adventists are big into pop psychology in adopting modern psychological approaches in their teaching style because at the root they think the problem is the picture is is is that people have a picture of God that’s faulty in their mind and since that’s the case that’s what keeps them from coming to God they don’t understand his true character and if we can just fix that then they’ll come to him so they place this big emphasis on trying to influence the psychology of an

Individual when that’s not the roote issue that’s why so many Adventists don’t have peace your issue is not your psychology friend there’s a deeper issue you need born again but but see adventism doesn’t understand the nature of man they don’t understand the real problem they think the Holy Spirit communicates to you in your brain and that’s why the health message comes in because you need to keep your mind in the clearest yeah Jesus said the wicked don’t come to the light because they hate the light knowing that it will expose their sin Romans 1 says that they love their sin

And suppress the truth of God in their unrighteousness Paul says everyone knows God exists but because they love their sin they exalt other things in the place of God to try and suppress that innate knowledge that’s obvious it’s like you go outside you look up at the stars and then people seriously try to say oh it’s just happen stance no you’re coming up with excuses they try to suppress the truth that’s obvious from both natural Revelation the creation itself as well as Divine special Revelation in the Sacred Scriptures it is not a psychological cognitive issue it’s a

Spiritual death issue so the solution that the AVST church is is trying to provide is not the actual antidote it’s not the real remedy no pun intended that’s the crazy thing is Tim jennings’s paraphrase is called the remedy but he doesn’t even have the remedy it’s Fool’s Gold the only solution friend the only solution is that God in his mercy and Grace raises the spiritually dead sinner to newness of Life giving them eyes to see and ears to hear resulting in their positive response to the call of the Gospel you may ask how do I how do I do that how do I get that you need to fall

On your knees and beg God you need to repent of thinking that God is on trial and that you’re the judge in the judge’s seat determining whether you think he’s worthy of what he is you’re not the judge you’re a creature you have a creature Creator issue here that’s another thing we need to start talking about that adventism does not understand the creature Creator distinction they got it completely backwards but this is why we have to be taking the gospel to Adventist a lot of you are new here we’ve seen a huge uptick of non former sdas Christians of

Various stripes and traditions welcome hop in there’s a lot of space in the bus and we’re going at break next speed the momentum is already going at this point you got to start getting caught up we have to be taking the gospel to Adventists especially the Neo Adventist types they are harder to reach than Orthodox Adventists because people like Ty Gibson and David Aster and Tim Jennings and the other Neo Adventists try and make adventism seem fresh with these new ideas and pop psychology and evang Evangelical is Vibes but at the end of the day it’s the same old product

In a new rapper do not be fooled just understand that this sort of stuff is out there in the Adventist world it’s not Orthodox by the book adventism it’s actually more dangerous because it better conceals the deception but we will pick back up on this in part two we will listen to more of Tim’s reimagine theory for how the investigative judgment can actually be a great teaching if you understand it the way he is hypothesized but until then may Christ richly bless you in the grace and peace won by him and his vicarious death on the cross for Sinners until

Next time God bless